(Not So) Blind Justice: The Effect of Face Coverings on Juror's Perceptions of Guilt

        Nick Otto, Elizabeth Holmes wearing a mask during trial for conspiracy to commit fraud, Getty Images (2021).

     The importance of a first impression cannot be overstated- after all, you only get one. One of the most significant ways in which people deduce a first impression is, for better or worse, by a person’s physical appearance. Studies have shown that attractive people are seen as smarter, more socially intelligent, and more mentally sound than less physically attractive people. Scientist have theorized that this preference is a form of the phenomenon known as "halo effect," where people attribute other positive qualities to a person who is more attractive. One of the most salient examples of the halo effect is in our very own country's election history. The theory that voters prefer the more attractive candidate has been tested and proven time and again. If the mere appearance of a human being can affect citizens' decisions regarding who runs their country, how might it affect their perception of their peers? More specifically, how might it affect a jury in deciding the guilt of a criminal defendant? 

    

     Unsurprisingly, numerous studies have shown that physical appearance does indeed bear weight on a juror’s perception of a defendant. In a study done in the Journal of Research in Personality, researchers found that a physically attractive person is more likely to be found less guilty than a less attractive person while they are charged with the same crime. Another study showed that physically attractive individuals found guilty of a particular crime are more likely to receive more generous sentences than less physically attractive defendants. Additionally, a study published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology found that physically unattractive defendants are considered to be more dangerous than physically attractive offenders in sex-related crimes.

    

     In many of today’s courtrooms, jurors and defendants alike are required to wear masks during trial. This creates a new problem in the courtroom- does wearing a mask help or hinder a criminal defendant’s case? The jury is still out on this one. One the one hand, we know that research exists proving that appearance can alter juror’s opinions of defendants, so it is a logical leap to conclude that covering one’s face could do the same. Some attorneys feel that covering your mouth, and therefore your smile, automatically makes one less attractive.  Others think it makes a defendant look “guilty,” because it appears that they have no reactions to the trial going on around them.  On the other hand, a recent paper in the Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition suggested that mask wearing has no effect at all, stating, “The face is not a reliable source of information; therefore, depriving observers of parts of the face ought not to hamper them when detecting deceit. It may actually benefit them if it means that they will focus on speech content instead.”  Of course, the decisions a jury makes are influenced by a multitude of factors that can never completely be accounted for, but it never hurts to look the part you’re trying out for.